User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 11:30:58 AM EDT
So not to have my other thread go in a new direction I wanted to start this one. I thought the General Firearm Discussion forum would also be the best place for it. Not sure if this has been brought up before and wanted a good discussion on it.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and this thread is not intended to give out legal advice. I do not have the time or money to proceed with this in any way. It’s just a thought I had, and wanted to see what you all think. I will also like to apologize for any grammar and spelling mistakes. I blame the FL school system  . Issue: 922(r), in a nut shell, is that an imported rifle cannot be made with more then 10 of these imported items. You can keep 10 but everything else has to be from the US. (f@#$%^g Stupid!) (1) Frames, receivers, receiver castings, forgings or stampings (2) Barrels (3) Barrel extensions (4) Mounting blocks (trunions) (5) Muzzle attachments (6) Bolts (7) Bolt carriers (8) Operating rods (9) Gas pistons (10) Trigger housings (11) Triggers (12) Hammers (13) Sears (14) Disconnectors (15) Butt stocks (16) Pistol grips (17) Forearms, hand guards (18) Magazine bodies (19) Followers (20) Floorplates Topic: By modifying an item, does it make it, manufactured in the place that it was modified at? In my option, the ATF has already answer this for us, and the answer is "YES”. Follow my logic here for a bit. In order to SBR any gun, you need to send in the paper work and get a stamp. At that time, you have to engrave the receiver with your name or trust name, city, and state, because you manufactured the SBR. The fact is you don’t have to do anything more they modified the design, and not make a darn thing in order to be the manufacture. Let’s take a US made AR15. All you have to do is get the form 1 approval, stamp in hand, engrave it, then slap another upper on it. That’s it, you’re done. So in same logic, if I take any foreign part, modify it, then I am the manufactured, here in the us. So if I take my EVO 3 pistol grip and stipple it, I have modify it, therefor I made it. Do I have anything here or am I just crazy? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 12:47:15 PM EDT
[#1]
You're trying to apply logic to bureaucratic rules. Can't do that. They've created rather arbitrary definitions of firearms and have requirements for when you change the firearm enough to change the definition of it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 1:32:00 PM EDT
[#2]
Maybe but until sombody can point to a recent example of an individual 922r violation, it's not worth my time to worry about it.
After 15 years of shooting sbr's and silencers at public ranges outside of Pittsburgh and baltimore, I am still waiting for a leo, local or fed to ask me about the legality or forms. You have a better chance of catching ebola than a 922r violation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 1:33:07 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
So not to have my other thread go in a new direction I wanted to start this one. I thought the General Firearm Discussion forum would also be the best place for it. Not sure if this has been brought up before and wanted a good discussion on it. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and this thread is not intended to give out legal advice. I do not have the time or money to proceed with this in any way. It’s just a thought I had, and wanted to see what you all think. I will also like to apologize for any grammar and spelling mistakes. I blame the FL school system .
Issue: 922(r), in a nut shell, is that an imported rifle cannot be made with more then 10 of these imported items. You can keep 10 but everything else has to be from the US. (f@#$%^g Stupid!) (1) Frames, receivers, receiver castings, forgings or stampings (2) Barrels (3) Barrel extensions (4) Mounting blocks (trunions) (5) Muzzle attachments (6) Bolts (7) Bolt carriers (8) Operating rods (9) Gas pistons (10) Trigger housings (11) Triggers (12) Hammers (13) Sears (14) Disconnectors (15) Butt stocks (16) Pistol grips (17) Forearms, hand guards (18) Magazine bodies (19) Followers (20) Floorplates Topic: By modifying an item, does it make it, manufactured in the place that it was modified at? In my option, the ATF has already answer this for us, and the answer is "YES”. Follow my logic here for a bit. In order to SBR any gun, you need to send in the paper work and get a stamp. At that time, you have to engrave the receiver with your name or trust name, city, and state, because you manufactured the SBR. The fact is you don’t have to do anything more they modified the design, and not make a darn thing in order to be the manufacture. Let’s take a US made AR15. All you have to do is get the form 1 approval, stamp in hand, engrave it, then slap another upper on it. That’s it, you’re done. So in same logic, if I take any foreign part, modify it, then I am the manufactured, here in the us. So if I take my EVO 3 pistol grip and stipple it, I have modify it, therefor I made it. Do I have anything here or am I just crazy? DADT. Once you change the config of a STOCK item from it's original shape you've now modified it. You do the math. Or write ANOTHER letter to the ATF for clarification. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 1:55:24 PM EDT
[#4]
Trade rules say materials of a foreign source must be substantially transformed to constitute made in USA. Those same rules say the materials must be all or substantially all USA materials to claim made in USA. Take those for what you will because there are varying definitions for what substantially transformed means, depending on who is reviewing the case. Country of origin is a very frustrating thing, unless it's clearly made in USA or not made in USA.
Then there is the ITAR portion where you may or may not care about being a controlled parts manufacturer. Mostly I think the rules are there to break those that suddenly find themselves the focus of unwanted attention. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 2:14:38 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Trade rules say materials of a foreign source must be substantially transformed to constitute made in USA. Those same rules say the materials must be all or substantially all USA materials to claim made in USA. Take those for what you will because there are varying definitions for what substantially transformed means, depending on who is reviewing the case. Country of origin is a very frustrating thing, unless it's clearly made in USA or not made in USA. Then there is the ITAR portion where you may or may not care about being a controlled parts manufacturer. Mostly I think the rules are there to break those that suddenly find themselves the focus of unwanted attention. Interesting: Substantially transformed??? So how is that defined. To me taking a pistol grip and stipple it, is transforming it to something new. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 3:09:01 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Interesting: Substantially transformed??? So how is that defined. To me taking a pistol grip and stipple it, is transforming it to something new. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Trade rules say materials of a foreign source must be substantially transformed to constitute made in USA. Those same rules say the materials must be all or substantially all USA materials to claim made in USA. Take those for what you will because there are varying definitions for what substantially transformed means, depending on who is reviewing the case. Country of origin is a very frustrating thing, unless it's clearly made in USA or not made in USA. Then there is the ITAR portion where you may or may not care about being a controlled parts manufacturer. Mostly I think the rules are there to break those that suddenly find themselves the focus of unwanted attention. Interesting: Substantially transformed??? So how is that defined. To me taking a pistol grip and stipple it, is transforming it to something new. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 3:16:39 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Interesting: Substantially transformed??? So how is that defined. To me taking a pistol grip and stipple it, is transforming it to something new. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Trade rules say materials of a foreign source must be substantially transformed to constitute made in USA. Those same rules say the materials must be all or substantially all USA materials to claim made in USA. Take those for what you will because there are varying definitions for what substantially transformed means, depending on who is reviewing the case. Country of origin is a very frustrating thing, unless it's clearly made in USA or not made in USA. Then there is the ITAR portion where you may or may not care about being a controlled parts manufacturer. Mostly I think the rules are there to break those that suddenly find themselves the focus of unwanted attention. Interesting: Substantially transformed??? So how is that defined. To me taking a pistol grip and stipple it, is transforming it to something new. It's defined however they want to. It doesn't matter what you think it means. Substantial would likely mean taking a piece of sheet metal and making it into a bumper. Or firearm related, taking a block of steel and milling it into a frame, slide, receiver, etc. if you took that plastic grip and cut it into small pieces and made plastic dovetail sights out of it, I'd say that's substantial. Adding grip with a soldering iron isn't. Now if you think you're in the right and don't mind putting up your freedom and attorney fees as a bet, go run with your definitions. Or you can write the ATF as already suggested (tongue in cheek) and get the answer we all already know. Or ignore the law and hope you don't run afoul of it. I would agree that no one is likely to pull you aside and count your parts. It's an extra burden to discourage manufacturers while claiming to promote American business (IMO anyway). The laws may be stupid, but it's less obnoxious following them than to deal with the consequences. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 11:14:59 PM EDT
[#8]
Didn't Benelli get their H20 M4 approved using this logic?
Send Italian gun to Robar, Robar applies NP3, Italian gun is now US gun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 11:47:20 PM EDT
[#9]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2015 6:55:18 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Didn't Benelli get their H20 M4 approved using this logic? Send Italian gun to Robar, Robar applies NP3, Italian gun is now US gun. The H20 M4 was not approved, in fact it was discontinued after ATF informed them that applying a new finish to an otherwise imported firearm does not comply with 922r. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2015 7:06:07 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Trade rules say materials of a foreign source must be substantially transformed to constitute made in USA. Those same rules say the materials must be all or substantially all USA materials to claim made in USA. Take those for what you will because there are varying definitions for what substantially transformed means, depending on who is reviewing the case. Country of origin is a very frustrating thing, unless it's clearly made in USA or not made in USA. Then there is the ITAR portion where you may or may not care about being a controlled parts manufacturer. Mostly I think the rules are there to break those that suddenly find themselves the focus of unwanted attention. This. Manufacturers routinely import partially finished parts for final machining and assembly in domestic automotive and other manufacturing sectors. If the part serves the same function both before and after "modification" then there has been no substantive change that allows "made in the USA" with all this entails. This is where you get "Assembled in the U.S." It's definitely worth noting that 922r does not address what constitutes a part that is "made in the US", simply that the firearm must be made in the US before it can be modified. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2015 7:41:08 PM EDT
[#12]
I guess I'll stick to my 3d printer plans until the CZ scorpion 922r Kits come out. Here I was ready to send out some parts for Np3 Coating
. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2015 8:38:26 PM EDT
[#13]
18 U.S.C. § 922(r)
It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) of this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes except that this subsection shall not apply to - The way that reads if you assemble a gun from parts that is the exact duplicate of one of the guns mentioned in section 925(d)(3) then you are breaking the law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2015 8:59:20 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 18 U.S.C. § 922(r) It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) of this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes except that this subsection shall not apply to - The way that reads if you assemble a gun from parts that is the exact duplicate of one of the guns mentioned in section 925(d)(3) then you are breaking the law. Are you trying to say I can't duplicate the parts? Cause I don't read it that way at all. To me is just states you can't use more then 10 import parts, that are listed, on any given rifle or shotgun. So you can't put more then 10 of the parts, from the list, on a US made AK. "identical to any rifle or shotgun" nothing to do with the components. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2015 9:31:44 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I got my 922r kit on amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Professional-Letter-Number-Stamp-Punch/dp/B005ESSZNC/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1436154268&sr=8-2&keywords=alphabet+punch+kit Lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:24:08 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are you trying to say I can't duplicate the parts? Cause I don't read it that way at all. To me is just states you can't use more then 10 import parts, that are listed, on any given rifle or shotgun. So you can't put more then 10 of the parts, from the list, on a US made AK. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
18 U.S.C. § 922(r) It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) of this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes except that this subsection shall not apply to - The way that reads if you assemble a gun from parts that is the exact duplicate of one of the guns mentioned in section 925(d)(3) then you are breaking the law. Are you trying to say I can't duplicate the parts? Cause I don't read it that way at all. To me is just states you can't use more then 10 import parts, that are listed, on any given rifle or shotgun. So you can't put more then 10 of the parts, from the list, on a US made AK. The original intent of the law was to prevent importing a Benelli "sporting" shotgun and then changing the stock and mag tube to build an duplicate of a banned gun (they had a very long list of guns named as not importable as they didn't have a "sporting" use.) I remember specifically the Benelli mentioned but don't remember the particular model. This was the advent of the thumbhole stock on many imported guns. The 10 US made parts was another way to insure no quick change of parts became a banned gun. The 1968 gun control law allows you to build a firearm from scratch even still (80% receivers and all that) but they came up with some checklist of parts that would keep you in compliance with the rules on a gun assembled from imported parts to keep it from being an imported gun. I have a Beretta shotgun that was legally imported into the US. If it had a 5 round magazine extension it would not be approved for import based on the "sporting" use provision. The design and manufacture of the gun was long after the AWB of 1994 and its demise 10 years later. So if I add a magazine extension will I suddenly become a felon on an expired statute and a gun that was not even designed when the AWB was in effect, while not on the "list", yet still legally imported today? Would I have to add another 9 American made parts to make it compliant? Some will say yes... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:38:25 AM EDT
[#17]
And back to the OP:
In order to SBR any gun, you need to send in the paper work and get a stamp. At that time, you have to engrave the receiver with your name or trust name, city, and state, because you manufactured the SBR. The fact is you don’t have to do anything more they modified the design, and not make a darn thing in order to be the manufacture. When you SBR a rifle you are the Maker not the manufacturer. You are Making a SBR. Make. The term “make”, and the various derivatives of such word, shall include manufacturing (other than by one qualified to engage in such business under the NFA) , putting together, altering, any combination of these, or otherwise producing a fiream. https://www.atf.gov/file/61521/download |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:57:16 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The original intent of the law was to prevent importing a Benelli "sporting" shotgun and then changing the stock and mag tube to build an duplicate of a banned gun (they had a very long list of guns named as not importable as they didn't have a "sporting" use.) I remember specifically the Benelli mentioned but don't remember the particular model. This was the advent of the thumbhole stock on many imported guns. The 10 US made parts was another way to insure no quick change of parts became a banned gun. The 1968 gun control law allows you to build a firearm from scratch even still (80% receivers and all that) but they came up with some checklist of parts that would keep you in compliance with the rules on a gun assembled from imported parts to keep it from being an imported gun. I have a Beretta shotgun that was legally imported into the US. If it had a 5 round magazine extension it would not be approved for import based on the "sporting" use provision. The design and manufacture of the gun was long after the AWB of 1994 and its demise 10 years later. So if I add a magazine extension will I suddenly become a felon on an expired statute and a gun that was not even designed when the AWB was in effect, while not on the "list", yet still legally imported today? Would I have to add another 9 American made parts to make it compliant? Some will say yes... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
18 U.S.C. § 922(r) It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) of this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes except that this subsection shall not apply to - The way that reads if you assemble a gun from parts that is the exact duplicate of one of the guns mentioned in section 925(d)(3) then you are breaking the law. Are you trying to say I can't duplicate the parts? Cause I don't read it that way at all. To me is just states you can't use more then 10 import parts, that are listed, on any given rifle or shotgun. So you can't put more then 10 of the parts, from the list, on a US made AK. The original intent of the law was to prevent importing a Benelli "sporting" shotgun and then changing the stock and mag tube to build an duplicate of a banned gun (they had a very long list of guns named as not importable as they didn't have a "sporting" use.) I remember specifically the Benelli mentioned but don't remember the particular model. This was the advent of the thumbhole stock on many imported guns. The 10 US made parts was another way to insure no quick change of parts became a banned gun. The 1968 gun control law allows you to build a firearm from scratch even still (80% receivers and all that) but they came up with some checklist of parts that would keep you in compliance with the rules on a gun assembled from imported parts to keep it from being an imported gun. I have a Beretta shotgun that was legally imported into the US. If it had a 5 round magazine extension it would not be approved for import based on the "sporting" use provision. The design and manufacture of the gun was long after the AWB of 1994 and its demise 10 years later. So if I add a magazine extension will I suddenly become a felon on an expired statute and a gun that was not even designed when the AWB was in effect, while not on the "list", yet still legally imported today? Would I have to add another 9 American made parts to make it compliant? Some will say yes... 922r was the result of the imported AK market in 1990. After the Bush import ban took effect, B-West and several other AK importers were stuck with their hands tied, but quickly figured out they could legally circumvent the ban by importing the same Chinese AK parts and receivers from Norinco and Polytech, then assemble the rifles here for sale. Perfectly legal for about a year until 922r was written and passed to seal up the loophole. This is why the parts list in the legislation reads like an AK schematic in particular. Benellis weren't even on the radar at the time since they were not banned from importation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:13:53 PM EDT
[#19]
I may be a little confused on which is which as it was a lifetime ago...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2015 11:12:17 PM EDT
[#20]
I don't care.
Hell when it first started, Springfield would sell you a FAL with thumbhole stock and have all the take off parts in the box. Later they sold them as a kit. Only gun nerds know any thing about 922r |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/9/2015 12:18:07 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Maybe but until sombody can point to a recent example of an individual 922r violation, it's not worth my time to worry about it. After 15 years of shooting sbr's and silencers at public ranges outside of Pittsburgh and baltimore, I am still waiting for a leo, local or fed to ask me about the legality or forms. You have a better chance of catching ebola than a 922r violation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/9/2015 3:30:46 PM EDT
[#22]
When I was into FALs, I had to worry about the "Magic 7 Parts" that suddenly made my post-ban rifles kosher (6 if you just chopped and recrowned the naked muzzle).
Now that I'm back to ARs, I find it hard to believe I was so worried about piddly shit. Best, JBR |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/9/2015 8:44:03 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe but until sombody can point to a recent example of an individual 922r violation, it's not worth my time to worry about it. After 15 years of shooting sbr's and silencers at public ranges outside of Pittsburgh and baltimore, I am still waiting for a leo, local or fed to ask me about the legality or forms. You have a better chance of catching ebola than a 922r violation. +1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/11/2015 8:25:18 PM EDT
[#24]
are you a manafacturer if you swap parts after you purchase a workingfire arm? i thought the answer was no.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/11/2015 11:10:29 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
are you a manafacturer if you swap parts after you purchase a workingfire arm? i thought the answer was no. No. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2015 9:33:22 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryCheaper than a bunch of us triggers or flashiders |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2015 3:53:20 PM EDT
[#27]
Engrave "U.S." on the part in question. You just modified it.
DS Arms got away with it so can you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2015 11:16:41 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:Mostly I think the rules are there to break those that suddenly find themselves the focus of unwanted attention. /this And how in the blue blazes do you prove that part (A) was made here or there for that matter. Most are not stamped with their country of origin. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2015 4:07:57 PM EDT
[#29]
Stamp U.S.A. on the part.
You just substantially changed it. IF YOU DON'T AGREE YOU'RE QUESTIONING THE SUBSTINANCE OF MY COUNTRY!!!!! Didn't DS Arms do just this for FAL components? Seriously though, no more letters people. The ATF screws us enough as it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2015 8:13:29 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Maybe but until sombody can point to a recent example of an individual 922r violation, it's not worth my time to worry about it. After 15 years of shooting sbr's and silencers at public ranges outside of Pittsburgh and baltimore, I am still waiting for a leo, local or fed to ask me about the legality or forms. You have a better chance of catching ebola than a 922r violation. I have been building AKs since 2004 and never understood or cared about The 92retardedness You sig is funny, I dropped $8k for a 2-3 MOA barret m82 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/27/2015 1:01:20 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This I have been building AKs since 2004 and never understood or cared about The 92retardedness You sig is funny, I dropped $8k for a 2-3 MOA barret m82 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Maybe but until sombody can point to a recent example of an individual 922r violation, it's not worth my time to worry about it. After 15 years of shooting sbr's and silencers at public ranges outside of Pittsburgh and baltimore, I am still waiting for a leo, local or fed to ask me about the legality or forms. You have a better chance of catching ebola than a 922r violation. The 92retardedness You sig is funny, I dropped $8k for a 2-3 MOA barret m82 lol. barrets are fun though |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
